Book Blurbs » Translated by Neely Swanson and Larry W. Swanson

Young Scientists Should First Attack Small Problems

admin — Tue, 12 May 2009 16:53:08 +0000

“It is well known that youth have a tendency to attack the major problems and begin their careers with a major piece of work. It is necessary to restrain such ambition, which might easily lead to discouraging failures, and make the beginner see the advantages of starting with the minor problems. He runs little risk of committing mistakes with them, and when he does there is no chance of ridicule. Later on, there will be opportunity to carry out the great work he dreams of, when technical aptitude and greater understanding are developed.” (p. 148)

What It Takes To Be a Successful Scientist

admin — Tue, 12 May 2009 16:50:29 +0000

“The future scientist is typically an ardent patriot who is eager to bring honor to himself and to his country, captivated by originality, indifferent to material gain and ordinary pleasures, inclined more toward action than words, and an untiring reader. In short, he is capable of all sorts of sacrifices to achieve the noble dream of giving his own name to some new start in the firmament of knowledge.” (p. 146)

How to Identify Young Scientists with Potential for Success

admin — Mon, 11 May 2009 16:43:05 +0000

“The diagnosis of a scientific calling is…difficult. One must use finer distinguishing signs to cull the genuine from the counterfeit.

“Ostwald has dealt with more or less the same problem in his admirable book, Great Men. He believes that especially gifted students may be recognized by the fact that they never appear satisfied with what ordinary instruction offers them: ‘In terms of depth and range covered, ordinary instruction is directed toward the average student. When a pupil has great talent, he will see at once that the science being taught is inadequate quantitatively, and above all qualitatively, and he will demand more.’ Then he adds: ‘The most important quality of the scholar is originality, that is, the ability to picture something beyond what is taught. Precision in one’s work, self-criticism, conscientiousness, knowledge, and skill are also necessary, but all can be acquired later through suitable eduction.’

“These observations of Ostwald are judicious and generally correct. However, for the master to benefit from them, he must be in friendly contact with his students. In his laboratory discussions he should treat them like colleagues working on a common goal, encouraging frankness and spontaneous expression. In doing so, the master finds opportunities to study the character of his pupils, as well as to gauge their vigor and firmness.” (p. 143-144)

Successful Science Can Start from Limited Resources

admin — Mon, 11 May 2009 16:38:34 +0000

“We could cite dozens of classic examples of modest beginnings…Enthusiasm and perseverance work miracles. It is the exception when an inexperienced investigator succeeds in launching his career with a memorable scientific achievement from a luxurious and well-appointed laboratory maintained by the state. From the point of view of actual success, it is not the instruments that are costly and require the most time, work, and patience…it is the development and maturing of talent. At the very worst, limited means condemn us to limit our inital steps, to narrow the scope of investigation. But after all, isn’t this an advantage?” (p. 94-95)

How to Choose a Research Topic

admin — Sun, 10 May 2009 16:33:56 +0000

“Finally, when we discover ourselves surrounded by a number of equally promising and fertile problems to work on, choose the one whose methodology we understand clearly, and the one we have a decided liking for. This is the good advice Darwin used to give his students when they asked for a problem to work on. The rationale for this approach is that our intellect redoubles its efforts when perceiving the reward of please or utility in the distance.” (p. 72)

Great Scientists vs. Encyclopedists: Sharp vs. Dull Swords

admin — Sun, 10 May 2009 16:31:13 +0000

“Like unmolded steel, our mind represents a potential sword. The forging and polishing of study transform it into the tempered and keen scalpel of science. Let us have a cutting edge on only one side, or on two at the most, if we want to conserve its analytical powers and penetrate to the heart of problems. Leave to the scatterbrained encyclopedists the privilege of transforming their minds into dull weapons.” (p. 58)

Unequaled Joys of Scientific Discovery

admin — Sat, 09 May 2009 16:24:00 +0000

“As we have already noted, the joyful emotion associated with the act of discovery is so great that it is easy to understand the sublime madness of Archimedes. Historians tell us that he was so beside himself after solving a profound problem that he burst forth almost naked from his house exclaiming the famous Eureka, ‘I have found it!’

…

“This indescribable pleasure–which pales the rest of life’s joys–is abundant compensation for the investigator who endures the painful and persevering analytical work that precedes the appearance of the new truth, like the pain of childbirth. It is true to say that nothing for the scientific scholar is comparable to the things that he has discovered. Indeed, it would be difficult to find an investigator willing to exchange the paternity of a scientific conquest for all the gold on earth. And if there are some who look to science as a way of acquiring gold instead of applause from the learned, and the personal satisfaction associated with the very act of discovery, they have chosen the wrong profession! They should wholeheartedly dedicate themselves to the exercise of industry or commerce instead.” (p. 50)

Scientists Should Concentrate on One Specific Research Area at a Time

admin — Sat, 09 May 2009 16:12:11 +0000

“Even those with mediocre talent can produce notable work in the various sciences, so long as they do not try to embrace all of them at once. instead, they should concentrate attention on one subject after another (that is, in different periods of time), although later work will undermine earlier attainments in the other spheres. This amounts to saying that the brain adapts to universal science in time but not in space. In fact, even those with great abilities proceed in this way. Thus, when we are astonished by someone with publications in different scientific fields, realize that each topic was explored during a specific period of time.” (p. 26)

Great Science Requires Deep Concentration

admin — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:07:07 +0000

“To pursue fully the topic of our research with the limited facilities that we have, let us forget unrelated pursuits and the parasitic ideas connected with the futile trifles of everyday life. Using strength and perseverance, concentrate deeply only on information pertinent to the question at hand. During the gestation period of our work, sentence ourselves to ignorance of everything else that is going on–politics, literature, music, and idle gossip. there are occasions when ignorance is a great virtue, almost a state of heroism. Useless books distract attention and are thus weighty, occupying as much space in our brinas as on the library shelf. They can spoil or hinder mental adjustments to the problem at hand. Although popular opinion may not agree, ‘Knowledge occupies space.’” (p. 25)

Fast vs. Slow Thinkers in Scientific Discovery

admin — Fri, 08 May 2009 16:01:34 +0000

“What we refer to as a great and special talent usually implies superiority that is expeditious rather than qualitative. In other words, it simply means doing quickly and with brilliant success what ordinary intellects carry out slowly but well. Instead of distinguishing between mediocre and great minds, it would be preferable and more correct in most instances to classify them as slow and facile. The latter are certainly more brilliant and stimulating–there is no substitute for them in conversation, oratory, and journalism, that is in all lines of work where time is a decisive factor. However, in scientific undertakings the slow prove to be as useful as the fast because scientists like artists are judged by the quality of what they produce, not by the speed of production. I would even venture to add that as a very common compensation slow brains have great endurance for prolonged concentration. They open wide, deep furrows in problems, whereas facile brains often tire quickly after scarcely clearing the land. There are, however, many exceptions to this generalization: Newton, Davy, Pasteur, Virchow, and others who were active minds who left a broad, luminoous wake.” (p. 24)